About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
to work, taking a shared responsibility approach to our long-term deficits so we bring them down in a balanced smart way and they rejected the idea that we're going to move the economy forward by giving windfall tax cuts to the very wealthiest in the country and the benefits of that would trickle down and lift everybody up. they rejected that lopsided approach that balance the budgets on the backs of everybody but the folks at the very top. balance the budget on the backs of our kids' education by slashing important investments. in that category of spending we make these important investments for our country and our future, they double the cut from the sequester. so those are our investments in our kids' education. those are our investments in science and research to help power our economy. those are our investments to help modernize our infrastructure. they cut transportation by 15% when we have 15% unemployment in the construction industry. so mr. chairman, the american people rejected the kind of uncompromising lopsided approach that we see once again presented here in the hou
% in three years and the deficit by force of $4 trillion and strengthen medicare and medicaid and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. how do you get 7 million new jobs in one year in your budget? money onu are spending infrastructure. we have a $2.20 trillion in infrastructure deficit according to the american society of civil engineers three allows people to work on roads, bridges, etc.. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. states have laid off 700,000 cops and firefighters and teachers. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy by putting aggregate demand. what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? >> we propose to different things. we propose to close tax loopholes. - indid the our budget close many we will of the corporate tax loopholes. he sablan the profits home by taxing it at 3% -- you say bring them profits home by testing it at 3%. we say no. money here and through accounting tricks make it appear as if it is in the cayman islands. we will tax it all. but he should get a
policy center, the ryan budget would have managed to actually add $5.7 trillion to the deficit . a close look at the math makes it clear that the ryan budget can't recoup the revenue lost from its tax cuts without imposing large tax increases on the middle class families. the tax policy center was unwilling to speculate on where the lost revenue would come from. in addition to the economic policy institute estimates that e ryan budget would kill 750,000 jobs this year, two million next year and increased gross domestic product by 1.7 percentage points. the priorities of this budget are all wrong. it kills jobs, stifles growth and adds to the deficit. all while making life harder for seniors, women, children and the most vulnerable in our society. the math of the budget just does not add up. simple arithmetic tells you that the only way to pay for mr. ryan's proposed tax cuts for the fortunate few is to eliminate many of the deductions that middle class families count on to pay for housing and health care and to save for their retirement. the ryan tax plan would further burden those who a
.s. debt that has been accrued since 2001. aboutrse when we think debt and deficits, there are two kinds of deficit. there are those that invest in human capital or infrastructure or investing in education, and those which do not, which endanger our future by adding to the national debt. and this war deficit was of the second type. third point that i am passionate about, although it is difficult for many people to be passionate about accounting, but i am passionate about the lack of war accounting. one of the purposes of our book and the several book chapters that we have written since then is to argue that bad accounting matters. the u.s. owes nearly a trillion dollars in what business would call deferred compensation to the men and women who fought the war, but this liability does not appear anywhere on the national balance sheet. we did not account for the value iraqe 6658 lives lost in and afghanistan. that is just the troops, not civilians, not contractors, except for small amount of life insurance money. even though civilian government agencies estimate the value of life at $7.20 m
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4